Home Forums Pianobook TX16Wx free version, can we submit libraries under this ‘sub-genre’?

Tagged: ,

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 33 total)
  • Author
  • #1658

    Hello everyone!
    Thank you all for so many great sounds and libraries! I am in TOTAL awe and I have learned so much about sampling sound from this site!
    I actually own Kontakt (FULL) but, I am NOT a fan of using it because it has an invisible pay wall in order to participate when using and promoting free content.
    As an ‘alternative’ I have picked using TX16Wx (free version) when creating my own samples. This is in both production and actual use. No, it is not the ‘cleanest’ interface or the simplest design. I admit that, up-front.
    However, the MAJORITY of samples on this site can be performed in the free version of this tool.
    Honestly, with a skilled creator, the TOTALITY of this vast library could be created with the commercial version (99$ total). Really, the ONLY thing missing is the round robins and some scripting features. Oh yeah, you can’t make ‘cool’ interfaces… fine.
    I am wondering if I make submissions using TX16Wx Free (or even the commercial version), will they be accepted and available to the public? Again, just asking because, to me, this is a far more available and distributed tool than any of the ‘text-doc based’ alternate options available now. I may be alone in this concept. I am good with that.
    Thanks for reading and I hope your samples all end up in Spitfire’s Labs eventually! I mean that! So many talented and creative composers out there have created a GRAND library… I just don’t want it to be ‘closed off’…

    Tim Clayton

    I would love to hear any answers to Ron’s question. I have a load of organ samples and I am learning to use TX16Wx in Reaper to make an instrument. I would love to share it when it is done if that is possible.

    Kontakt is outside my price range and the paid version of TX16Wx is only 39 euros and does so much.


    I must have tried TX16Wx three or four times in the past, and found it buggy. I just had a go with the latest version, and it seems pretty stable. It can import but not export SFZ files.
    As for my take on publishing in the TX16Wx XML format, here are my thoughts:
    The format seems fine, and well documented though dense. It looks like:

          <tx:region tx_mode="DFD" tx_attenuation="0 dB" tx_pan="0%" tx_wave="93" tx_root="B4" tx_fine="0">
             <tx:bounds tx:high-vel="127" tx:low-key="A#4" tx:low-vel="0" tx:high-key="B4"/>

    Ron_K mentioned that it does not have round-robins. It has them, but only in the pro version. Both SFZ and Decent Sampler (DS) support round-robins and random-robins in the free versions (the random-robin implementation is complicated in SFZ).

    Ron_K mentioned it is a far more available and distributed tool. I’m not sure what is meant by that, as Sforzando (the main sfz player) and DS are free and also run on Windows and Mac. Looks like TX16Wx has been around since 2012, Sforzando since 2009 but the (SFZ format is older [before 2005]), DS I think is new this year.

    Ron_K seems to feel negatively about text-doc based sample formats, but TX16Wx is also text based (XML). TX16Wx does have a useable graphical front end built into the vst that saves to XML. for SFZ there is a graphical program called SFZ designer, as well as Polyphone, although the latter requires importing and exporting to SFZ. For finding good loop points, there is the program Endless-Wave that runs on Mac and Windows. Polyphone also has a loop suggester, but I find Endless-Wave to be better. DS is XML based but there is no Graphical Editor. My personal preference is for text, as I find it faster, but everyone has a preference.

    Final thoughts: There is an old joke about a computer programmer upset that there are 14 different standards for a particular process. He vows to make the one standard that everyone will use. One year later, there are now 15 standards… I find a lack of round-robins to be a pretty big negative, and it was clearly left out of the free version to push people toward the paid versions. Sforzando leaves out the ability to create a pretty UI unless you contact the developer and either pay or are granted a free waiver (up to them). while DS allows both. So while I don’t see a need for yet another format for Pianobook, with so many already (Kontakt5, Kontakt6, EXS, SFZ, DS [newly added I believe] and even one in Sequential Prophet X format) what’s one more?


    For the record: TX16Wx free can play back round-robin (and any other instrument feature) in loaded programs. The pro version is only required for editing/creating such materials. And import of SFZ or any other format that contains RR will preserve and them play back regardless of free or paid version.


    hi all
    I am using the free tx16wx for several weeks now.It is the only sampler that support the EMS-ESP tuning format.
    This sampler can import sfz and exs sample packs.But some of the available samplepacks here on pianobook don’t work…….Sometimes when importing the sampler is looking for samples.Not clever enough to understood or change the scripts of the packs.So it could be usefull to have dedicated samplepacks for the tx16wx….
    If you are interested in microtonality or ethnic scales ,have a look at the EMS-ESP tuning format…

    any way ,many thanks for all the libraries already available in sfz and exs format that performs well in the tx16wx……

    have nice days


    Sometimes when importing the sampler is looking for samples.

    Do you mean it can’t find the directory or path to the samples?

    Sometimes even the SFZ files from here don’t work and just a matter or editing to file to the correct PATH.


    yes it must be something like this……
    I have already tried to relocate the samples in the same directory as the instrument preset but maybe you have to change the path in the script also …..
    Complicated samplepacks with layers and a lot of samples are also more not working……
    Pianopacks like ‘automn piano’ don’t work.Samples are loaded but playing the instrument is impossible…..
    At this moment,I am sorting out the packs that work……
    I am 63 ,and my brains are not so ‘script friendly ‘any more…..😰😎😇

    Eoin O’Dowd

    I created a basic python script to convert tx16wx maps to decent sampler here it is if anyone is interested:


    Complicated samplepacks with layers and a lot of samples are also more not working……

    I don’t really use TX16Wx for importing SFZ files but could be not converting properly due to there being 2 versions of SFZ (v1/v2 Codecs)?


    As I mentioned before,I use tx16wx because it is the only sampler supporting microtonality with the MTS-ESP tuning standard.It seems that the exs libraries are working better than the sfz.It is not clear if tx16wx can import both types of fsz.
    Also,I am not able to understand the script or use of the compiler that Eoin has written.Also it has to compile libraries from decent sampler to fsz for my use.
    Any way ,thanks for replies…….

    Eoin O’Dowd

    Hi, I’m currently working on the gui for this and it’s more evolved, it takes the .TXPROG file and ouputs a .dspreset file that’s loadable in decentsampler, I will possibly work on another similar project for exporting to .sfz later on.


    hi Eoin….
    This could be usefull for me to have a compiler from decent sampler to sfz format to import in tx16wx.
    thanks in advance…….

    Eoin O’Dowd

    currently have a windows 10 build / release up on github this is for conversion of txprog to decent sampler format

    Eoin O’Dowd

    looks good …..
    a ds2tx utility will look even better for me…..
    it seems that there is not that much reaction to use tx16wx as a microtonal sampler player……
    but I will explore a ds2tx tool for sure……
    but take your time……..😎

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 33 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.